IAN: The site owner, Carol Valentine, has also
"debunked" the Nazi holocaust... ahem. Claims
of disagreement do not inherently indicate
that evidence is suspect. The only basis for
disagreement in The Washington Post article
is the claim that the flashes are reflections
of sunlight. The main problem with that claim
is that the flashes often occur at cyclic rates
identical to machine-gun fire. The odds that
pieces of glass will often emit reflections
in rapid pulses is flatly implausible.

Doctor Allard is one of the world's top FLIR
experts, as is Fred Zegel, quoted in the article
you posted to your site wherein Zegel states:
"In one instance, where the guys drop from tanks,
that was firing... There was no reflection." The
fact is that the flashes are ideally shaped like
the muzzle flashes of guns, wide at one end and
tapering toward the other end. There are not
reflections, or flashes, seen in any of the
areas of debris where there should be a lot
of broken glass. The Post also observes that
those it queried were "defense contractors."
It's surprising then that several of them did
agree that the FLIR shows gun shots when you
consider that they were paid via the same entity
they would be accusing of murder if they said
they were gun shots. A clear conflict of interest.

Dr. Allard speaks the plane and visible truth
when The Post notes that "he says the weapons
signatures are so clear as to eliminate all
doubt." Also, an ex-CIA agent who was recently
interviewed by Dallas Morning News claims that
Delta Force agents fired shots at the building.
A Congressional Committee has recently promised
him protection from threats against his life.